Thanks everyone that looked over the code.
I should be in the state of ready to be merged into master,
and I would like to get the merge wheels going on.
We know not everything is perfect there, but I would like
to address the issues in further PRs because:
we're proceeding with rewriting the orch actions into Dynflow
and would be nice to be able to open the PRs one by one against Katello
master instead of opening the PRs against dynflow branch (I guess not
so many people track these PRs)
there is ongoing work on CV updates, it would be nice to be able to
use dynflow orchestration capabilities in the cv-branch, which is not possible.
This means we will need to update the code twice: 1. reflecting the changes in CV
logic in old code and 2. updating the old-style orchestration into dynflow actions.
Would be nice to be able to squash these two things into one (I also believe
that using Dynflow makes writing the orchestration code more comfortable, with things
like dynflow web-console or ability to resume failed process)
we have plugin for hammer cli supporting the dynflow-based async operations, blocked
by this PR
web browser has issues loading the PR page
some of the issues are not clear how to address (such as UI design of tasks table,
task progress and task status field values), and actually using it by broader audience
might help with finding the right way to go
keeping the branch in sync with master is kind of painful (although there were not that much
conflicts past two weeks)
I would like into agreement on what needs to be done to get that into master, and what
things can be addressed from the master. I would like really to focus on main blockers.
> From: "Ivan Necas" <inecas@redhat.com>
> To: "foreman-dev" <foreman-dev@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:28:15 AM
> Subject: [foreman-dev] Katello Dynflow branch: call for merge
>
> Hi,
>
> We went quite a long way since I've wrote the mail about
> opening the PR into Katello with initial Dynflow support.
>
> https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/3550
>
> Thanks everyone that looked over the code.
> I should be in the state of ready to be merged into master,
> and I would like to get the merge wheels going on.
> We know not everything is perfect there, but I would like
> to address the issues in further PRs because:
>
> * we're proceeding with rewriting the orch actions into Dynflow
> and would be nice to be able to open the PRs one by one against Katello
> master instead of opening the PRs against dynflow branch (I guess not
> so many people track these PRs)
>
> * there is ongoing work on CV updates, it would be nice to be able to
> use dynflow orchestration capabilities in the cv-branch, which is not
> possible.
> This means we will need to update the code twice: 1. reflecting the
> changes in CV
> logic in old code and 2. updating the old-style orchestration into
> dynflow actions.
> Would be nice to be able to squash these two things into one (I also
> believe
> that using Dynflow makes writing the orchestration code more comfortable,
> with things
> like dynflow web-console or ability to resume failed process)
>
> * we have plugin for hammer cli supporting the dynflow-based async
> operations, blocked
> by this PR
>
> * web browser has issues loading the PR page
>
> * some of the issues are not clear how to address (such as UI design of
> tasks table,
> task progress and task status field values), and actually using it by
> broader audience
> might help with finding the right way to go
>
> * keeping the branch in sync with master is kind of painful (although there
> were not that much
> conflicts past two weeks)
>
> I would like into agreement on what needs to be done to get that into master,
> and what
> things can be addressed from the master. I would like really to focus on main
> blockers.
>
> Thanks
>
> – Ivan
>
>
>
> > From: "Ivan Necas" <inecas@redhat.com>
> > To: "foreman-dev" <foreman-dev@googlegroups.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:28:15 AM
> > Subject: [foreman-dev] Katello Dynflow branch: call for merge
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We went quite a long way since I've wrote the mail about
> > opening the PR into Katello with initial Dynflow support.
> >
> > https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/3550
> >
> > Thanks everyone that looked over the code.
> > I should be in the state of ready to be merged into master,
> > and I would like to get the merge wheels going on.
> > We know not everything is perfect there, but I would like
> > to address the issues in further PRs because:
> >
> > * we're proceeding with rewriting the orch actions into Dynflow
> > and would be nice to be able to open the PRs one by one against
> Katello
> > master instead of opening the PRs against dynflow branch (I guess not
> > so many people track these PRs)
> >
> > * there is ongoing work on CV updates, it would be nice to be able to
> > use dynflow orchestration capabilities in the cv-branch, which is not
> > possible.
> > This means we will need to update the code twice: 1. reflecting the
> > changes in CV
> > logic in old code and 2. updating the old-style orchestration into
> > dynflow actions.
> > Would be nice to be able to squash these two things into one (I also
> > believe
> > that using Dynflow makes writing the orchestration code more
> comfortable,
> > with things
> > like dynflow web-console or ability to resume failed process)
> >
> > * we have plugin for hammer cli supporting the dynflow-based async
> > operations, blocked
> > by this PR
> >
> > * web browser has issues loading the PR page
> >
> > * some of the issues are not clear how to address (such as UI design of
> > tasks table,
> > task progress and task status field values), and actually using it by
> > broader audience
> > might help with finding the right way to go
> >
> > * keeping the branch in sync with master is kind of painful (although
> there
> > were not that much
> > conflicts past two weeks)
> >
> > I would like into agreement on what needs to be done to get that into
> master,
> > and what
> > things can be addressed from the master. I would like really to focus on
> main
> > blockers.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > – Ivan
> >
>
> +1. Moving it to master asap is advisable. We need to probably add the
> dynaflow, foreman-tasks gems to
> https://github.com/Katello/katello/blob/master/doc/katello.local.rb.
>
> I think that is already covered here - https://github.com/Katello/katello/blob/dynflow/katello.gemspec#L40 and by
the fact that foreman-tasks includes dynflow.
Eric
···
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Partha Aji wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
